By Adam Naranjo
I was listening to some
James Jordan tapes, and he brought up Luke
21:22, which says, “because these are days of vengeance, so that all things
which are written will be fulfilled.” I was thinking about how hyper-Preterists
(who, among other things, believe that ALL biblical prophecy was fulfilled by a.d. 70, including the resurrection of the dead) are always
banging the gong of Luke 21:22 saying, “See! All
things will be fulfilled.” Hyper-Preterists argue that our Lord is referring to
the destruction of
Luke 20:20″But when
you see
Clearly Christ was speaking of ad. 70, when
However, I disagree with
hyper-Preterists in that I don’t believe that ALL
prophecy was fulfilled by ad. 70 (including the
resurrection and final judgment). (hyper-Preterists
deny a physical resurrection) I believe that hyper-Preterists are wrong in this
respect because their view does not fit with the teaching of scripture. Their
view is in disagreement with ALL of the orthodox creeds which
uniformly profess faith in the resurrection of the BODY yet to come. Also,
their typical take on Luke 21:22 proves FAR to much - in other words, if taken
to it’s logical conclusion their understanding of Luke
21:22 would become absurd.
If these
hyper Preterists want to take “all” - in “so that all things which are written will be fulfilled” - to mean
literally every single prophecy (which is necessary for their interpretation of
this passage) they would be bound to say that all of the prophecies in
scripture were fulfilled at the destruction of the temple - including
prophecies that don’t at all refer to those days of vengeance. Let me put it
this way: In order for them to defend their understanding of this passage they
have to make the referent of “all” to be every ‘prophecy in scripture’ (other
wise the referent could be too narrowly defined), otherwise one may assume the
obvious - that Christ doesn’t mean EVERY single prophecy, he means only those
prophecies that pertain to the tribulation and destruction of the
temple. If they will agree that “all” must be
understood in the light of the rest of the teaching of scripture, then
we might make some headway. However, I find that far too often they start
with this passages as a foundational argument proving
that all of the prophecies must have been fulfilled by end of these
“days of vengeance”. If they really want “all” to mean “every single prophecy”
(so that they can argue that ALL prophecy was fulfilled and that there will be
no second advent of Christ, resurrection, or final judgment in the future) then
they must be willing to say that all prophecy - everything! - was fulfilled
during these times of vengeance. It’s all in how
they’re using the word “all”.
They would never argue this
way - and for good reason. Instead they would want to
say that “all” refers to some specific prophecies, not ALL prophecy. At this point we can agree…the question is WHICH prophecies. It
cannot be ALL of them, because this would lead to the completely absurd
situation I referred to earlier. Never the less, I’ve
read and heard hyper-Preterists make these simple
linguistic mistakes. Every word has a referent and if they want ‘all’ to really
refer to ‘all’ without distinction they would be left with an absurd proposal
wherein they would prove far to much.
as of 2-2007